I totally get EON scrapping faux-SPECTRE when they got the rights back to actual-SPECTRE. Not a problem. A few lines saying 'Quantum is a subsidiary of SPECTRE focused on acquiring natural resources across the world' is all that would have been necessary to at least explain away the organization and acknowledge the fact that an entire movie in the franchise was focused on said organization. Giving absolutely minimal service to Green also feels like they're trying to pretend that QOS doesn't even exist.
Also, it's really clear that SPECTRE was meant to be Craig's last film as Bond. That ending doesn't really make it ambiguous at all. They can say what they want about NTTD but I firmly believe that they only made it as a means to not end Craig's run of films on something that critics and fans scoffed at.
Mr White, of course, is a Quantum man, having been in bed with SPECTRE all along but (totally unconvincingly) fallen out with Blofeld on ethical grounds! SP's retcon leaves Le Chiffre in an even more confusing position. If we're now expected to believe that Le Chiffre was one of SPECTRE's own, it doesn't make sense that in CR Mr White claims a separation between his (White's) "organisation" and Le Chiffre, describing the relationship as limited to one of simply 'making the introduction' (to Obanno).
I try not to think too much about all of that. In SP, when Blofeld says to James that "it's been a long time", I like to think that he means it's been a long time since Mr. Bond bumped him up and down in the Bathosub or dropped him down an industrial chimney! (When Blofeld's helicopter is about to crash in London, Christoph Waltz looks far less alarmed than his predecessors were in those earlier scenes!)
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 53 years.
Well crap. I made a typo correction in my breakdown of SPECTRE and it appears to have been wiped. @Sir Miles , can you fix that or otherwise restore it?
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 30,889Chief of Staff
I even put on the NTTD watch to prep for it. I've long been a champion of this film, even with the controversial finality of the ending, but it dropped a few notches in this viewing. Safin is too underwritten and doesn't have enough presence in the first two acts to feel as effective as he should, and the film could really stand to use an edit to tighten things up.
The good:
Very well acted from everyone, typical of the Craig films in general.
The film looks great with incredible production values throughout. Linus Sandgren shoots the heck out of the interiors with the third act setting of the island base being particularly effective.
Cary Fukunaga directs the hell out of this. The film flows beautifully with many innovative shot compositions. The viewer always understands what's going on and has a clear idea of the overall geography of a scene.
The action sequences are all, at a minimum, 'good'. They're well shot and edited. The Cuba action sequence with Bond and Paloma stands out as being particularly well done...it's exciting and injected with just the right of character-based humor. The Norway sequence is also quite strong. The opening pre title sequence elements in Italy are also pretty great.
The emotional core of the film works. Time is actually spent here to build up the relationship between Bond and Swann, and we get just the right amount of time spent with Mathilde to buy in on the necessary plot motivations for Bond's big death scene. Craig and Seydoux are also better in this film than in SPECTRE...the script is better at making you believe that there's love between the two of them, and the two actors feel more at ease with each other. I still think that Craig has more of a spark with virtually any other lady in the film (like Paloma) but he and Seydoux have SOME chemistry here...enough to make the plot work, anyways.
Felix gets a good death. He dies doing his job as any great spy should. Wright and Craig play the death scene extremely well and the emotional beat hits exactly right. 'It's a good life'.
Bond gets a good death. Like Felix, he dies doing his job. Spies should not get a happy retirement on the beach, they should go out on a mission saving the world. Bond gets that and gets to cap off the Craig run of films in a satisfying way...that's my opinion, anyways. Also, his final moments are extremely effective in terms of selling the emotional cost of the film with Madeleine and Mathilde. His death is further enhanced by the fantastic scene where the MI6 regulars drink a toast in his honor. The poem that M reads provides a perfect capper to the Craig run of Bond films.
The V8 Vantage returns. Love this car.
I love the callbacks to prior films. OHMSS, the best overall film in the franchise, is referenced the most and I love how the music from that film was utilized throughout this film.
The not so good:
Safin is a cool character and I really enjoy what Rami Malek brings to the role, but he's underwritten and underutilized. He makes a few fleeting appearances in the first two acts and never gets to really establish an identity. When he is finally fully present in the third act, it kinda feels 'too little, too late'. He gets a fantastic death, though...Bond just emptying his gun into him as he walks away is AWESOME.
The sound mix in certain sequences could be better. The Cuba sequence with Blofeld talking through his eye is an example of this...we watched the film with subtitles on and it's amazing just how much we missed in prior viewings. Blofeld is actually conveying a lot of information in this scene that was completely lost on me before due to the mix. There are other places in the film where the subtitles revealed missed dialog that cleared up other plot elements.
The climactic fight on the island base goes on too long. I'd like to see this edited down to be tighter and more concise, especially considering that the film itself is just under three hours in overall length.
Overall, it's a very solid film. I don't love it like I did before but it's pretty firmly in the middle of the pack.
Current rankings on this franchise rewatch (note, I also moved SP above TWINE in my ranking...I think the outstanding train fight makes SP a better film):
OHMSS
FRWL
CR
TSWLM
MR
FYEO
TND
SF
QOS
DN
GE
NTTD
TLD
YOLT
TMWTGG
OP
TB
LTK
GF
DAF
DAD
LALD
SP
TWINE
AVTAK
As to my favorite Bonds, I kinda have to go:
Lazenby>Moore>Craig>Connery>Brosnan>Dalton
Lazenby gets the top spot as he's in my favorite Bond film.
I liked your summary of SP. This is a difficult one for me as I enjoy the film's production values while considering the whole narrative as naff. It is too complex - as far as I want to see it, there are two plots joined at the hip and each exactly the same, almost as if the producers meshed two screenplays into one. As you point out, the Blofeld Brother moment is superfluous and an embarrassing nod to crap like the MCU or, as you say, Austin Powers. The film is too long and misses too many opportunities to inject some genuine James Bond moments, replacing action and suspense with psychological garbage, hence the tension is non-existent. I dislike the MI6 Scooby Gang and while Nine Eyes has potential, it should have been used in a different movie. I agree Blofeld should associate SPECTRE to Quantum and leave it at that. If you do away with the brother rubbish, the film can have its climax at Blofeld's lair, blow it up, give him a scar, hey presto. It is an okay Bond, but I like it less now.
NTTD I won't comment on as I have not watched it since I bought the DVD. Three viewings is not enough to convey my thoughts, most of which are still angry.
It's hard to deny that SPECTRE is a well made film from a technical level. It's well acted with fantastic production values. It also flat out looks great. A lot of money, effort, and talent went into making an incredibly stupid and dull movie.
I like Spectre but that's because I just like it - but it bets it all on the viewer liking that movie whereas many Bond films after Thunderball hedge their bets by having two or even three plots on the go. YOLT for instance is not merely about capsules in space but in fact more about Bond's interaction with the Far East and so on. If Spectre's main plot and overall vibe doesn't grab you, there's not much going on there.
@HarryCanyon I’ve really enjoyed your run-through of the Bond movies. I don’t always agree with everything you say, but that is to be expected with whoever reads your reviews. I loved the league table with a new entry being added on each review.
It’s made me think that it would be a good running feature for members here to do the same thing, if they have the time to do it in a period of say - 6 weeks? Who’s next? Any volunteers?
Yeah, well, sometimes nothin' can be a real cool hand.
Chucked on the DAF BluRay last night and while this movie has a boatload of cons I really enjoyed it.
I went back and looked at the pros and cons thread on this forum and one of the common cons was calling out a drab appearance. Now perhaps this has to do with the restoration but I thought overall the movie actually looked really good, bright and crisp. I would also argue a slightly blue and washed out colour treatment came across as quite modern. There were some specific shots that look awesome like the helicopter landing with Wint and Kidd, the tunnel out from the underground facility, the long zoom shots and panning, the camera angles of the satellite and also the ground angles when Bond gets dragged off at the crematorium. The b roll stuff at the mines is also quite cool looking.
DAF is the most Austin Powers of the Bonds because of how much more ridiculous the nature of this film is, specifically with the guards, and mostly focused on private American industry.
The PTS is incredibly funny and also very cool in a weird way.
Cannot avoid calling out a con...Jill St John is really really bad.
I caught a bit of NTTD last night. All it did was get me thinking why did they bring Blofeld and Madeleine back. I thought they were both very weak characters in Spectre so no idea why they thought they should be brought back.
I’ve said it before but I find NTTD a very difficult film to watch. I generally just watch the Jamaica scenes. The DC era started with the best Bond film ever in my opinion and ended with a very poor one.
They had to bring them back because the Craig run of films has an actual continuity to it unlike the others (which had a loose continuity). Not bringing them back to tie up those plotlines, especially considering that NTTD was the 'last' Craig Bond film, would not have satisfied.
To that end, I appreciate how cleanly they dealt with SPECTRE as an organization in NTTD. Boom, gone. And Madeleine actually had a lot more to do in NTTD and worked better with Bond overall.
GOLDFINGER, last night, Dad wanted to watch it and while I was only half way interested, I ended up sitting through the whole thing.
I dunno, maybe I should check out @HarryCanyon reviews again - he placed it really low - and I kinda understand his opposition. There is an awful lot wrong with the film, but so much is exceptionally good I tend to run with all of that and just gloss over the dodgy bits and pieces. It is enough to say that the film tells quite a long and involved 4-quarters story [Miami - England - Switzerland - Kentucky] with tremendous pace. I can imagine a CraigBond version of this lasting at least half an hour longer, developing character and personal motivations, making sure people like Mr Lim and Kish have bigger roles to play.
Despite the OO7 / Pussy Galore furore that surround this movie now - and indeed Bond's treatment of all the women in this is fairly rough and ready - I brushed that off with the same brush off I gave the stupidity of the Delta 9 nerve gas being dispensed from a few airbourn canisters. Yeh, you would do it differently now, but this was 1964; watch any movie of this ilk around the time and you'll see exactly the same scenarios. Masquerade would be one; In Like Flint another; hell, let's go back to Cary Grant's Devlin in Notorious and that was 1946. I think about XXX and the blatent sex object roles the women [mostly] perform in that. I know the precise scene in GF we are speaking of and I do think it could have been handled better by director Guy Hamilton; this is not a scripting issue it is a directing one, where the man at the helm hasn't bothered to make his actors develop the relationship effectively. Pussy is too standoffish, there isn't even the hint of flirtation. So she is supposed to be a lesbian, but the 'turning' of her shouldn't be so sudden. The only word I would change is "I'm immune" to "I'm a professional."
Still, good fun, a great villain, a great soundtrack, great song, great car and car chase, good performances from the three main players, great titles, fantastic PTS, remarkably funny given its age.
For overall influence across the ensuing sixty years I would still give it top marks. It is hard to beat, although more 'serious' offerings tend to get my personal vote.
Goldfinger is an incredibly smooth watch. One minor snag I now pick up on is that the editor voiced a view that they hadn't quite tightened it up, they didn't have time because the producers did a screening and had to have it ready for the US market - during it, the editor said he and his pal looked at each other occasionally, thinking, 'That needs to be shortened' but they never did. So, as legendary Brit critic John Brosnan pointed out, one or two scenes go on too long. But, as Connery himself pointed out after a rewatch with his grandkids decades later, it has a sort of charm, you don't want the scenes to move on too quickly.
It is a superbly witty script, you can see that Diamonds tried to mimic that (with some success imo). It's a standalone Bond, a classic bit of UK movie TV like The Sound of Music, The Great Escape and so on.
Got drawn into OHMSS because my sister stayed the course on it, it was on at Xmas but it's a bit too much for that time of year, a bit indigestible. This viewing was okay.
If you've been catching the reruns of 70s sitcom Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads? - written by future Bond scribes Dick Clement and Ian Le Frenais - you might pick up on my observation, that the lanky miserable fella mistaken for Terry Collier when they are hoping to spring a surprise birthday party - is the Griffin Ore character at the College of Arms, the fleetingly seen sidekick of Sir Hilary Bray. The actor also went on to appear in Z Cars, also being repeated, on Talking Pictures TV.
I prefer OHMSS at the cinema but on telly one tends to expect Connery and the dialogue does seem written for him, it's quite witty but neither Lazenby or frankly the Sir Hilary actor George Baker does it particularly well. The action is brilliant however, once it gets going, as is the cinematography. It's great on many levels, just not the bread and butter side of it, I find.
Does The Spy Who Loved Me have the best final half of any Bond film?
Just re-watched it and wow. Once they get to Sardegna it's all go. The Liparus and Atlantis finale is phenomenal and the submarine stuff is all excellent. The tension is well played with the detonator and then of course the submarine blow ups.
Roger Moore is so so good in this, he looks amazing and carries the film with such gravitas and cool energy.
But back to the original question...is this the best second half or at least the best finale?
I will say that the Egypt part of the movie is actually fairly weak. Fekesh running off makes no sense and the trail to find the microfilm is pretty bland. The cut and paste job in MR and espionage stuff there is much stronger.
I know this gets mentioned to death but Ken Adam's sets. Just wow.
TSWLM is fantastic from the opening sequence to the final 'curtain call'. The setup is good and the mission, once it truly gets underway, makes sense and has great pacing. The third act is in the conversation for best overall third act of any of the Bond films. The only really duff element in the film is Barbara Bach as Anya...she's just too flat of an actress to really make the character resonate. With a better actress...
The Spy Who Loved Me is on ITV4 tonight (Thurs) at 8pm.
The finale goes on a bit too long for me but it's hard on paper to pick a better second half - that said, with some films it's hard to say exactly when the second half begins. OHMSS may better it, of course. Live And Let Die, perhaps. Most do tend to coast a bit towards the end, happy to have banked their wins.
The whole microfilm piece in Egypt is more about showing off the scenery and location than anything else, and then of course it all leads to a silly MI6 location in the field. Once you've seen it a few times I'd say it's one of the weaker parts of the film because they're just rinse and repeat set ups with Jaws killing Fekesh and then Kelba and then the cat and mouse game at the ruin.
While there are a few callouts around Bach being quite wooden and Anya being a useless agent, plus a dated (but good) Hamlisch score I'd say the Egypt stuff for me is the only con.
Another pro? The model work, matte shots etc. are all exceptional.
I really like all of that cat and mouse stuff in Egypt. It feels like actual spycraft and is refreshing to see before the plot really kicks into gear. I also get a kick out of the Q scenes as this is where Q himself really starts to shine as comic relief in the franchise.
I like the Hamlisch score. If you're going to do a 70s influenced riff on the James Bond aesthetic that Barry perfected, this is the way to do it. It's really only the Bill Conti and Eric Serra scores that don't work for me.
And heck yes on the model work. I commented on that in my review a few weeks ago.
Sir MilesThe Wrong Side Of The WardrobePosts: 30,889Chief of Staff
It was years before I knew this was just a cut out of Roger propped up 🤭
Comments
I totally get EON scrapping faux-SPECTRE when they got the rights back to actual-SPECTRE. Not a problem. A few lines saying 'Quantum is a subsidiary of SPECTRE focused on acquiring natural resources across the world' is all that would have been necessary to at least explain away the organization and acknowledge the fact that an entire movie in the franchise was focused on said organization. Giving absolutely minimal service to Green also feels like they're trying to pretend that QOS doesn't even exist.
Also, it's really clear that SPECTRE was meant to be Craig's last film as Bond. That ending doesn't really make it ambiguous at all. They can say what they want about NTTD but I firmly believe that they only made it as a means to not end Craig's run of films on something that critics and fans scoffed at.
Mr White, of course, is a Quantum man, having been in bed with SPECTRE all along but (totally unconvincingly) fallen out with Blofeld on ethical grounds! SP's retcon leaves Le Chiffre in an even more confusing position. If we're now expected to believe that Le Chiffre was one of SPECTRE's own, it doesn't make sense that in CR Mr White claims a separation between his (White's) "organisation" and Le Chiffre, describing the relationship as limited to one of simply 'making the introduction' (to Obanno).
I try not to think too much about all of that. In SP, when Blofeld says to James that "it's been a long time", I like to think that he means it's been a long time since Mr. Bond bumped him up and down in the Bathosub or dropped him down an industrial chimney! (When Blofeld's helicopter is about to crash in London, Christoph Waltz looks far less alarmed than his predecessors were in those earlier scenes!)
oh for sure, it doesn't make a lick of sense.
Great stuff on QoS and I actually think quite a few folks are changing their opinion on it as time goes on.
"Better make that two."
Well crap. I made a typo correction in my breakdown of SPECTRE and it appears to have been wiped. @Sir Miles , can you fix that or otherwise restore it?
Tis done 😁
It just hit the spam folder because of the couple of changes done quickly…
NO TIME TO DIE
I even put on the NTTD watch to prep for it. I've long been a champion of this film, even with the controversial finality of the ending, but it dropped a few notches in this viewing. Safin is too underwritten and doesn't have enough presence in the first two acts to feel as effective as he should, and the film could really stand to use an edit to tighten things up.
The good:
The not so good:
Overall, it's a very solid film. I don't love it like I did before but it's pretty firmly in the middle of the pack.
Current rankings on this franchise rewatch (note, I also moved SP above TWINE in my ranking...I think the outstanding train fight makes SP a better film):
As to my favorite Bonds, I kinda have to go:
Lazenby>Moore>Craig>Connery>Brosnan>Dalton
Lazenby gets the top spot as he's in my favorite Bond film.
I liked your summary of SP. This is a difficult one for me as I enjoy the film's production values while considering the whole narrative as naff. It is too complex - as far as I want to see it, there are two plots joined at the hip and each exactly the same, almost as if the producers meshed two screenplays into one. As you point out, the Blofeld Brother moment is superfluous and an embarrassing nod to crap like the MCU or, as you say, Austin Powers. The film is too long and misses too many opportunities to inject some genuine James Bond moments, replacing action and suspense with psychological garbage, hence the tension is non-existent. I dislike the MI6 Scooby Gang and while Nine Eyes has potential, it should have been used in a different movie. I agree Blofeld should associate SPECTRE to Quantum and leave it at that. If you do away with the brother rubbish, the film can have its climax at Blofeld's lair, blow it up, give him a scar, hey presto. It is an okay Bond, but I like it less now.
NTTD I won't comment on as I have not watched it since I bought the DVD. Three viewings is not enough to convey my thoughts, most of which are still angry.
It's hard to deny that SPECTRE is a well made film from a technical level. It's well acted with fantastic production values. It also flat out looks great. A lot of money, effort, and talent went into making an incredibly stupid and dull movie.
One hears a lot of good and bad about CR, QoS, SF and NTTD. Hardly much gets said about SP. Pretty telling.
"Better make that two."
it's a cure for insomnia, that's why.
😁
I like Spectre but that's because I just like it - but it bets it all on the viewer liking that movie whereas many Bond films after Thunderball hedge their bets by having two or even three plots on the go. YOLT for instance is not merely about capsules in space but in fact more about Bond's interaction with the Far East and so on. If Spectre's main plot and overall vibe doesn't grab you, there's not much going on there.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
@HarryCanyon I’ve really enjoyed your run-through of the Bond movies. I don’t always agree with everything you say, but that is to be expected with whoever reads your reviews. I loved the league table with a new entry being added on each review.
It’s made me think that it would be a good running feature for members here to do the same thing, if they have the time to do it in a period of say - 6 weeks? Who’s next? Any volunteers?
Chucked on the DAF BluRay last night and while this movie has a boatload of cons I really enjoyed it.
I went back and looked at the pros and cons thread on this forum and one of the common cons was calling out a drab appearance. Now perhaps this has to do with the restoration but I thought overall the movie actually looked really good, bright and crisp. I would also argue a slightly blue and washed out colour treatment came across as quite modern. There were some specific shots that look awesome like the helicopter landing with Wint and Kidd, the tunnel out from the underground facility, the long zoom shots and panning, the camera angles of the satellite and also the ground angles when Bond gets dragged off at the crematorium. The b roll stuff at the mines is also quite cool looking.
DAF is the most Austin Powers of the Bonds because of how much more ridiculous the nature of this film is, specifically with the guards, and mostly focused on private American industry.
The PTS is incredibly funny and also very cool in a weird way.
Cannot avoid calling out a con...Jill St John is really really bad.
"Better make that two."
I caught a bit of NTTD last night. All it did was get me thinking why did they bring Blofeld and Madeleine back. I thought they were both very weak characters in Spectre so no idea why they thought they should be brought back.
I’ve said it before but I find NTTD a very difficult film to watch. I generally just watch the Jamaica scenes. The DC era started with the best Bond film ever in my opinion and ended with a very poor one.
They had to bring them back because the Craig run of films has an actual continuity to it unlike the others (which had a loose continuity). Not bringing them back to tie up those plotlines, especially considering that NTTD was the 'last' Craig Bond film, would not have satisfied.
To that end, I appreciate how cleanly they dealt with SPECTRE as an organization in NTTD. Boom, gone. And Madeleine actually had a lot more to do in NTTD and worked better with Bond overall.
GOLDFINGER, last night, Dad wanted to watch it and while I was only half way interested, I ended up sitting through the whole thing.
I dunno, maybe I should check out @HarryCanyon reviews again - he placed it really low - and I kinda understand his opposition. There is an awful lot wrong with the film, but so much is exceptionally good I tend to run with all of that and just gloss over the dodgy bits and pieces. It is enough to say that the film tells quite a long and involved 4-quarters story [Miami - England - Switzerland - Kentucky] with tremendous pace. I can imagine a CraigBond version of this lasting at least half an hour longer, developing character and personal motivations, making sure people like Mr Lim and Kish have bigger roles to play.
Despite the OO7 / Pussy Galore furore that surround this movie now - and indeed Bond's treatment of all the women in this is fairly rough and ready - I brushed that off with the same brush off I gave the stupidity of the Delta 9 nerve gas being dispensed from a few airbourn canisters. Yeh, you would do it differently now, but this was 1964; watch any movie of this ilk around the time and you'll see exactly the same scenarios. Masquerade would be one; In Like Flint another; hell, let's go back to Cary Grant's Devlin in Notorious and that was 1946. I think about XXX and the blatent sex object roles the women [mostly] perform in that. I know the precise scene in GF we are speaking of and I do think it could have been handled better by director Guy Hamilton; this is not a scripting issue it is a directing one, where the man at the helm hasn't bothered to make his actors develop the relationship effectively. Pussy is too standoffish, there isn't even the hint of flirtation. So she is supposed to be a lesbian, but the 'turning' of her shouldn't be so sudden. The only word I would change is "I'm immune" to "I'm a professional."
Still, good fun, a great villain, a great soundtrack, great song, great car and car chase, good performances from the three main players, great titles, fantastic PTS, remarkably funny given its age.
For overall influence across the ensuing sixty years I would still give it top marks. It is hard to beat, although more 'serious' offerings tend to get my personal vote.
Goldfinger is an incredibly smooth watch. One minor snag I now pick up on is that the editor voiced a view that they hadn't quite tightened it up, they didn't have time because the producers did a screening and had to have it ready for the US market - during it, the editor said he and his pal looked at each other occasionally, thinking, 'That needs to be shortened' but they never did. So, as legendary Brit critic John Brosnan pointed out, one or two scenes go on too long. But, as Connery himself pointed out after a rewatch with his grandkids decades later, it has a sort of charm, you don't want the scenes to move on too quickly.
It is a superbly witty script, you can see that Diamonds tried to mimic that (with some success imo). It's a standalone Bond, a classic bit of UK movie TV like The Sound of Music, The Great Escape and so on.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Got drawn into OHMSS because my sister stayed the course on it, it was on at Xmas but it's a bit too much for that time of year, a bit indigestible. This viewing was okay.
If you've been catching the reruns of 70s sitcom Whatever Happened to the Likely Lads? - written by future Bond scribes Dick Clement and Ian Le Frenais - you might pick up on my observation, that the lanky miserable fella mistaken for Terry Collier when they are hoping to spring a surprise birthday party - is the Griffin Ore character at the College of Arms, the fleetingly seen sidekick of Sir Hilary Bray. The actor also went on to appear in Z Cars, also being repeated, on Talking Pictures TV.
I prefer OHMSS at the cinema but on telly one tends to expect Connery and the dialogue does seem written for him, it's quite witty but neither Lazenby or frankly the Sir Hilary actor George Baker does it particularly well. The action is brilliant however, once it gets going, as is the cinematography. It's great on many levels, just not the bread and butter side of it, I find.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
^ 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻 I feel sad for those who cannot appreciate the genius of OHMSS, the greatest of all Bond movies.
OHMSS stars off by the sea and ends up on a mountain top - it's wrong on so many levels...
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Does The Spy Who Loved Me have the best final half of any Bond film?
Just re-watched it and wow. Once they get to Sardegna it's all go. The Liparus and Atlantis finale is phenomenal and the submarine stuff is all excellent. The tension is well played with the detonator and then of course the submarine blow ups.
Roger Moore is so so good in this, he looks amazing and carries the film with such gravitas and cool energy.
But back to the original question...is this the best second half or at least the best finale?
I will say that the Egypt part of the movie is actually fairly weak. Fekesh running off makes no sense and the trail to find the microfilm is pretty bland. The cut and paste job in MR and espionage stuff there is much stronger.
I know this gets mentioned to death but Ken Adam's sets. Just wow.
"Better make that two."
TSWLM is fantastic from the opening sequence to the final 'curtain call'. The setup is good and the mission, once it truly gets underway, makes sense and has great pacing. The third act is in the conversation for best overall third act of any of the Bond films. The only really duff element in the film is Barbara Bach as Anya...she's just too flat of an actress to really make the character resonate. With a better actress...
The Spy Who Loved Me is on ITV4 tonight (Thurs) at 8pm.
The finale goes on a bit too long for me but it's hard on paper to pick a better second half - that said, with some films it's hard to say exactly when the second half begins. OHMSS may better it, of course. Live And Let Die, perhaps. Most do tend to coast a bit towards the end, happy to have banked their wins.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
The whole microfilm piece in Egypt is more about showing off the scenery and location than anything else, and then of course it all leads to a silly MI6 location in the field. Once you've seen it a few times I'd say it's one of the weaker parts of the film because they're just rinse and repeat set ups with Jaws killing Fekesh and then Kelba and then the cat and mouse game at the ruin.
While there are a few callouts around Bach being quite wooden and Anya being a useless agent, plus a dated (but good) Hamlisch score I'd say the Egypt stuff for me is the only con.
Another pro? The model work, matte shots etc. are all exceptional.
"Better make that two."
I really like all of that cat and mouse stuff in Egypt. It feels like actual spycraft and is refreshing to see before the plot really kicks into gear. I also get a kick out of the Q scenes as this is where Q himself really starts to shine as comic relief in the franchise.
I like the Hamlisch score. If you're going to do a 70s influenced riff on the James Bond aesthetic that Barry perfected, this is the way to do it. It's really only the Bill Conti and Eric Serra scores that don't work for me.
And heck yes on the model work. I commented on that in my review a few weeks ago.
It was years before I knew this was just a cut out of Roger propped up 🤭